COVID-19 as a risk factor for long-term mortality in patients managed by the emergency medical system: A prospective, multicenter, ambulance-based cohort study.

Introduction: COVID-19 has initially been studied in terms of an acute-phase disease, although recently more attention has been given to the long-term consequences. In this study, we examined COVID-19 as an independent risk factor for long-term mortality in patients with acute illness treated by EMS (emergency medical services) who have previously had the disease against those who have not had the disease. Methods: A prospective, multicenter, ambulance-based, ongoing study was performed with adult patients with acute disease managed by EMS and transferred with high priority to the emergency department (ED) as study subjects. The study involved six advanced life support units, 38 basic life support units, and five emergency departments from Spain. Sociodemographic inputs, baseline vital signs, pre-hospital blood tests, and comorbidities, including COVID-19, were collected. The main outcome was long-term mortality, which was classified into 1-year all-cause mortality and 1-year in- and out-of-hospital mortality. To compare both the patients with COVID-19 vs. patients without COVID-19 and to compare survival vs non-survival, two main statistical analyses were performed, namely, a longitudinal analysis (Cox regression) and a logistic regression analysis. Results: Between 12 March 2020 and 30 September 2021, a total of 3,107 patients were included in the study, with 2,594 patients without COVID-19 and 513 patients previously suffering from COVID-19. The mortality rate was higher in patients with COVID-19 than in patients without COVID-19 (31.8 vs. 17.9%). A logistic regression showed that patients previously diagnosed with COVID-19 presented higher rates of nursing home residency, a higher number of breaths per minute, and suffering from connective disease, dementia, and congestive heart failure. The longitudinal analysis showed that COVID-19 was a risk factor for mortality [hazard ratio 1.33 (1.10-1.61); p < 0.001]. Conclusion: The COVID-19 group presented an almost double mortality rate compared with the non-COVID-19 group. The final model adjusted for confusion factors suggested that COVID-19 was a risk factor for long-term mortality.

Stakeholder perspectives of piloting pre-hospital COVID-19 lateral flow testing and direct admissions pathway: exploring why well-received ideas have low uptake.

Introduction: In January 2021, Yorkshire Ambulance Service and Hull University Teaching Hospitals implemented a pilot COVID-19 lateral flow testing (LFT) and direct admissions pathway to assess the feasibility of using pre-hospital LFTs to bypass the emergency department. Due to lower than anticipated uptake of the pilot among paramedics, we undertook a process evaluation to assess reasons for low uptake and perceived potential benefits and risks associated with the pilot. Methods: We undertook semi-structured telephone interviews with 12 paramedics and hospital staff. We aimed to interview paramedics who had taken part in the pilot, those who had received the project information but not taken part and ward staff receiving patients from the pilot. We transcribed interviews verbatim and analysed data using thematic analysis. Results: Participation in the pilot appeared to be positively influenced by high personal capacity for undertaking research (being 'research-keen') and negatively influenced by 'COVID-19 exhaustion', electronic information overload and lack of time for training. Barriers to use of the pathway related to 'poor timing' of the pilot, restrictive patient eligibility and inclusion criteria. The rapid rollout meant that paramedics had limited knowledge or awareness of the pilot, and pilot participants reported poor understanding of the pilot criteria or the rationale for the criteria. Participants who were involved in the pilot were overwhelmingly positive about the intervention, which they perceived as having limited risks and high potential benefits to the health service, patients and themselves, and supported future roll-out. Conclusions: Ambulance clinician involvement in rapid research pilots may be improved by using multiple recruitment methods (electronic and other), providing protected time for training and increased direct support for paramedics with lower personal capacity for research. Improved communication (including face-to-face approaches) may help understanding of eligibility criteria and increase appropriate recruitment.

Journal update monthly top five

Correspondence to Dr Gabrielle Prager, Emergency Department, Wythenshawe Hospital, Manchester, Greater Manchester, UK;lgprager@doctors.org.uk This month’s update has been prepared by the Emergency Medicine & Intensive Care Research Group (EMERGING) from Manchester. Head turner Predicting which patients will survive an out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) with good functional outcomes could help guide resuscitative efforts. Lack of blinding is a potential source of bias, but the apparent preference of parents for immobilisation may influence physician choice of treatment.2 Bottom line In children treated for Torus fractures, there is no difference in self-reported pain or function using a simple bandage versus a splint or cast. Notably, since this paper was published, the UK RECOVERY trial suggested a probable benefit in using them together.5 6 Bottom line In patients with COVID-19 requiring oxygen and receiving remdesivir, there was no difference in ventilator-free survival between those treated with baricitinib or dexamethasone.

Association of the COVID-19 pandemic with bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: a population-based analysis in Tokyo, Japan.

BACKGROUND: The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) is unclear. This study aimed to investigate whether rates of bystander CPR and patient outcomes changed during the initial state of emergency declared in Tokyo for the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: This retrospective study used data from a population-based database of OHCA maintained by the Tokyo Fire Department. By comparing data from the periods before (18 February to 6 April 2020) and during the declaration of a state of emergency (7 April 2020 to 25 May 2020), we estimated the change in bystander CPR rate, prehospital return of spontaneous circulation, and survival and neurological outcomes 1 month after OHCA, accounting for outcome trends in 2019. We performed a multivariate regression analysis to evaluate the potential mechanisms for associations between the state of emergency and these outcomes. RESULTS: The witnessed arrest rates before and after the declaration periods in 2020 were 42.5% and 45.1%, respectively, compared with 44.1% and 44.7% in the respective corresponding periods in 2019. The difference between the two periods in 2020 was not statistically significant when the trend in 2019 was considered. The bystander CPR rates before and after the declaration periods significantly increased from 34.4% to 43.9% in 2020, an 8.3% increase after adjusting for the trend in 2019. This finding was significant even after adjusting for patient and bystander characteristics and the emergency medical service response. There were no significant differences between the two periods in the other study outcomes. CONCLUSION: The COVID-19 pandemic was associated with an improvement in the bystander CPR rate in Tokyo, while patient outcomes were maintained. Pandemic-related changes in patient and bystander characteristics do not fully explain the underlying mechanism; there may be other mechanisms through which the community response to public emergency increased during the pandemic.

Evolution of Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome in Emergency and Critical Care: Therapeutic Management before and during the Pandemic Situation.

Background and Objectives: Acute respiratory distress syndrome is a life-threatening lung condition that prevents enough oxygen from getting to the lungs and blood. The causes can be varied, although since the COVID-19 pandemic began there have been many cases related to this virus. The management and evolution of ARDS in emergency situations in the last 5 years was analyzed. Materials and Methods: A systematic review was carried out in the PubMed and Scopus databases. Using the descriptors Medical Subject Headings (MeSH), the search equation was: "Emergency health service AND acute respiratory distress syndrome". The search was conducted in December 2021. Quantitative primary studies on the care of patients with ARDS in an emergency setting published in the last 5 years were included. Results: In the initial management, adherence to standard treatment with continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) is recommended. The use of extracorporeal membrane reduces the intensity of mechanical ventilation or as rescue therapy in acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). The prone position in both intubated and non-intubated patients with severe ARDS is associated with a better survival of these patients, therefore, it is very useful in these moments of pandemic crisis. Lack of resources forces triage decisions about which patients are most likely to survive to start mechanical ventilation and this reflects the realities of intensive care and emergency care in a resource-limited setting. Conclusions: adequate prehospital management of ARDS and in emergency situations can improve the prognosis of patients. The therapeutic options in atypical ARDS due to COVID-19 do not seem to vary substantially from conventional ARDS.

Epidemiologic characteristics and pre-hospital care of traumatic injuries during the COVID-19 pandemic in an emerging and developing country: A single tertiary centre experience.

BACKGROUND: Pre-hospital care has been shown to reduce the mortality in trauma patients. The present study is an attempt to identify the status of pre-hospital orthopaedic trauma care in developing countries during COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: This was a prospective observational study carried out in a tertiary care setup from March 25th, 2020 to January 31st, 2021. All the data pertaining to the traumatic injuries including demographic details and epidemiologic characteristics were recorded in an electronic database. RESULTS: A total of 1044 patients were included in the study for evaluation. The mean age was 35.24 ± 19.84 years. There were 873 males and 171 females. A total of 748 presented from nearby states, with 401 being the referrals and 347 cases coming directly to hospital. A total of 141 open fractures presented directly and 269 were referred from nearby states. Out of 269 cases of open fractures, only 67 and 139 were given intravenous antibiotics and had wound dressing done respectively at the periphery site. A total of 125, 112, 92 and 84 patients were received without traction/splintage, intravenous fluids, dose of analgesics and recording of vitals respectively. Delay from injury to presentation in emergency/administration of antibiotic (Hours) was 7.06. Road side accidents were main cause comprising of 52.58% cases. Gustilo Anderson classification grade-2 comprised of majority of the open fractures (51.63%). Lower limb fractures comprised of majority of the injuries (70.59%). Majority were adults and conservative management was the most common mode of treatment. A total of 197 and 265 patients had associated head injuries and blunt trauma chest/blunt trauma abdomen respectively. CONCLUSION: Emphasizing on pre-hospital care measures, with special focus on co-ordination between primary, secondary and tertiary health care facilities is the need of the hour and can prevent additional morbidities, avoiding overburden of the already compromised healthcare centres.

Emergency Medical Services resource capacity and competency amid COVID-19 in the United States: preliminary findings from a national survey.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to investigate available resources, Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) availability, sanitation practices, institutional policies, and opinions among EMS professionals in the United States amid the COVID-19 pandemic using a self-report survey questionnaire. METHODS: An online 42-question multiple choice survey was randomly distributed between April 1, 2020, and April 16, 2020 to various active Emergency Medical Services (EMS) paid personnel in all 50 U.S. states including the District of Columbia (n = 192). We approximate a 95% confidence interval (±0.07). RESULTS: An overwhelming number of EMS providers report having limited access to N95 respirators, receiving little or no benefits from COVID-19 related work, and report no institutional policy on social distancing practices despite CDC recommendations. For providers who do have access to N95 respirators, 31% report having to use the same mask for 1 week or longer. Approximately ⅓ of the surveyed participants were unsure of when a COVID-19 patient is infectious. The data suggests regular decontamination of EMS equipment after each patient contact is not a regular practice. DISCUSSION: Current practices to educate EMS providers on appropriate response to the novel coronavirus may not be sufficient, and future patients may benefit from a nationally established COVID-19 EMS response protocol. Further investigation on whether current EMS practices are contributing to the spread of infection is warranted. The data reveals concerning deficits in COVID-19 related education and administrative protocols which pose as a serious public health concern that should be urgently addressed.

Pre-Hospital Management of Critically Ill Patients with SARS-CoV-2 Infection: A Retrospective Multicenter Study.

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 outbreak had a major impact on healthcare systems worldwide. Our study aims to describe the characteristics and therapeutic emergency mobile service (EMS) management of patients with vital distress due to COVID-19, their in-hospital care pathway and their in-hospital outcome. METHODS: This retrospective and multicentric study was conducted in the six main centers of the French Greater East region, an area heavily impacted by the pandemic. All patients requiring EMS dispatch and who were admitted straight to the intensive care unit (ICU) were included. Clinical data from their pre-hospital and hospital management were retrieved. RESULTS: We included a total of 103 patients (78.6% male, median age 68). In the initial stage, patients were in a critical condition (median oxygen saturation was 72% (60-80%)). In the field, 77.7% (CI 95%: 71.8-88.3%) were intubated. Almost half of our population (45.6%, CI 95%: 37.1-56.9%) had clinical Phenotype 1 (silent hypoxemia), while the remaining half presented Phenotype 2 (acute respiratory failure). In the ICU, a great number had ARDS (77.7%, CI 95% 71.8-88.3% with a PaO2/FiO2 < 200). In-hospital mortality was 33% (CI 95%: 24.6-43.3%). The two phenotypes showed clinical and radiological differences (respiratory rate, OR = 0.98, p = 0.02; CT scan lesion extension >50%, OR = 0.76, p < 0.03). However, no difference was found in terms of overall in-hospital mortality (OR = 1.07, p = 0.74). CONCLUSION: The clinical phenotypes appear to be very distinguishable in the pre-hospital field, yet no difference was found in terms of mortality. This leads us to recommend an identical management in the initial phase, despite the two distinct presentations.